On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Bill Nottingham <notting(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Miloslav Trmač (mitr(a)volny.cz) said:
When calculating local on-system provides, it should - in fact, I'd be
surprised if it doesn't. Admins sometimes move directories around and
replace them with symlinks.
Well, that's a very different scenario.
Is the statement that it won't take it into account for an
initial install
transaction?
My statement is that packages on a F17 system won't declare that they
install /bin/foo (unless an explicit "compat" provides is written into
the spec file).
So external packages (_not_ coming from Fedora) may depend on
/bin/foo, and yum won't know what to install.
Perhaps yum can be taught explicitly about these symlinks, or perhaps
the whole repo needs a whole lot of "provides" added. Cannot right now
see a practical 3rd option.
Note that I'm _for_ the /usr move, just being curious (perhaps
annoying) about some technical details. The benefits are compelling
for many things I do in my personal computing, and for the work we do
@ OLPC.
From the OLPC angle, I favour yum being taught about the symlinks -- a
big pile of provides will only grow the yum sqlite database, and
that's _not_ good news for bandwidth-limited users, nor for
RAM-limited devices. Like XOs :-)
cheers,
m
--
martin.langhoff(a)gmail.com
martin(a)laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC
- ask interesting questions
- don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first
-
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff